[eBook] Free - Encyclopedia of Human Evolution/Making Sense of World History/Anthropologies of Revolution - Amazon AU/US

1110

Affiliate

Go to Deal

Cashback

Lysander on 29/05/2021 - 09:31 amazon.com.au (1120 clicks)

This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

Three more interesting freebies for the start of the day - lots of knowledge to gain.

Encyclopedia of Human Evolution and Prehistory: Second Edition: https://www.amazon.com.au/Encyclopedia-Human-Evolution-Prehi…

Making Sense of World History: https://www.amazon.com.au/Making-Sense-World-History-Szostak…

Anthropologies of Revolution: Forging Time, People, and Worlds: https://www.amazon.com.au/Anthropologies-Revolution-Forging-…

US Links:

Encyclopedia of Human Evolution and Prehistory: Second Edition: https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Human-Evolution-Prehisto…

Making Sense of World History: https://www.amazon.com/Making-Sense-World-History-Szostak-eb…

Anthropologies of Revolution: Forging Time, People, and Worlds: https://www.amazon.com/Anthropologies-Revolution-Forging-Peo…

Enjoy!

Related Stores

Amazon AU

Marketplace

Amazon Cloud Reader

• 

  canberrascooter on 29/05/2021 - 10:19

  -6

  I sense the left and sjw are gonna be offended by this book. To them, there is no evolution, all races have the same skull shape, intelligence and genetic make up.

  • 

    dainese on 29/05/2021 - 10:38

    +4

    Is this really a 'left' thing though?

  • 

    alidli on 29/05/2021 - 10:47

    Bill Gates's dad would definitely disagree with the last sentence.

  • 

    fantombloo on 29/05/2021 - 11:33

    +4

    I sense you have no idea what you're talking about.

    • 

      canberrascooter on 29/05/2021 - 12:49

      I sense you are a woke sjw

      • 

        fantombloo on 29/05/2021 - 13:49

        -1

        I think biological evolution is currently the best explanation for describing how we got to where we are now, that various humans have differing ancestors with many varying attributes, that intelligence is an abstract idea and not something concretely measurable by a test developed by Europeans, that everyone's genetic makeup is unique yet somewhat similar.

        So, tell me more about my political leanings.

        • 

          [Deactivated] on 29/05/2021 - 16:29

          @fantombloo: If evolution is the best explanation I'd hate to see the worst explanation. Evolution doesn't even qualify as science. i.e. It cannot be observed or repeated. Therefore it a belief system, a faith or religion: not science. Nothing presented as 'evolution' actually demonstrates evolution. It's all smoke and mirrors in that they say, "We have all this evidence of evolution…" then they insert something which doesn't qualify. Even Darwin himself said his THEORY (people forget this part) depended upon finding certain hard evidence in the future to validate his postulations. We're still waiting.

          • 

            fantombloo on 29/05/2021 - 16:33

            @[Deactivated]:

            THEORY (people forget this part)

            You are the weakest link. Goodbye.

            • 

              [Deactivated] on 29/05/2021 - 16:39

              -2

              @fantombloo: What does a game show catchline have to do with evolution? You're thinking of "missing link" (which btw, exactly 0 of which have been found).

              • 

                fantombloo on 29/05/2021 - 16:42

                +1

                @[Deactivated]: Nothing to do with evolution, everything to do with your comment.

                • 

                  [Deactivated] on 29/05/2021 - 17:06

                  -3

                  @fantombloo: Which was about evolution… as is this thread.

                  So I guess you're chuckling, confident I'm the weakest link, dumb, whatever… for not 'believing' a theory is fact. (The faith is strong in this one.) That's good. So you must believe in science, right? And you would know that: a) A theory requires evidence before it can be considered anything more than a theory, so b) to be classed as "scientific" a theory has to meet certain criteria, and c) if it doesn't, at some point, it has to be discarded.

                  Here's just two random definitions of "science" pulled from online:

                  1. "Science is the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic METHODOLOGY based on EVIDENCE."

                  2. Science is a SYSTEMATIC enterprise that builds and organizes KNOWLEDGE (observable fact) in the form of TESTABLE explanations and predictions about the universe.

                  Since I'm the "weakest link" here, and obviously you're confident stepping up to mock someone else… give us just ONE observable/testable example, just ONE real evidence of evolution that follows a "systematic methodology", can be "tested", and/or is "based on evidence".

                  Because if you can't… It might not be me that's the 'weakest link'.

                  For the sake of brevity, let's skip ahead. After you realise you can't find any, answer this: how long should we keep giving lip service, defending a theory as scientific fact, when it doesn't meet the definition of science?

                  • 

                    fantombloo on 30/05/2021 - 00:50

                    @[Deactivated]: Calm down dude. I've said nothing about you being the weakest anything. The fact that you give away the notion that you have no idea what a scientific theory is utterly reduces your argument to something not worthy of much consideration. That's all.

                    • 

                      [Deactivated] on 30/05/2021 - 01:05

                      +1

                      @fantombloo: I know exactly what a scientific theory is LOL. I wasn't getting 'uncalm', I was merely answering. Interesting how you were stumped so tried to change tack though. ;-)

                      • 

                        fantombloo on 30/05/2021 - 01:21

                        @[Deactivated]:

                        I know exactly what a scientific theory is LOL.

                        I'm just some random dude on the internet - no real gain in convincing me about anything. Why not make a great difference and go tell the scientific world and update the Wikipedia page while you're at it.

  • 

    swalloweda on 29/05/2021 - 11:37

    +2

    Irrelevant attempt at using evolution to justify racism. You obviously understand neither.

    • 

      DarthPyro on 29/05/2021 - 12:25

      +1

      can't use something that never happened (macro)

    • 

      [Deactivated] on 29/05/2021 - 16:36

      -1

      You're obviously unaware of evolutions long history aligned with racism. In fact it's a perfectly logical conclusion to draw, that if we 'evolve', some races must be less or more evolved than others. The only other stance is to believe all races are evolved equally, and that's so statistically improbable it may as well be considered impossible. So when you subscribe to the religion of evolution (it's a belief system, not a science - see above), you basically have to simultaneously accept by default the qualifications of a certified racist.

      • 

        swalloweda on 29/05/2021 - 17:51

        -1

        You choose not to consider science (which you admit) because you evidently don't understand it to hold on to your religious and racist worldview: "it's a belief system"? Really?

        All "races" or ethic groups are the same species (homo sapiens sapiens), but with different characteristics.

        i.e. "Race is a system of classification of human beings that divides human beings into large subdivisions based upon their anatomical, physical, ethnic, cultural, and geographical differences. There is no biological basis to this system of human classification as all human beings ultimately belong to the same species of homo-sapiens. Race is a concept that is subjective as humans belonging to so called different races can mate and produce human beings naturally."

        • 

          [Deactivated] on 30/05/2021 - 00:11

          @swalloweda:

          You choose not to consider science

          Not at all, in fact the very opposite. I'm defending REAL science. Just because someone says a theory is 'scientific' doesn't make it so. As above, they have an obligation to investigate and find proof - not fabricate it, not use smoke and mirrors by replacing what should be a silk purse with a cow's ear.

          The theory of evolution has been around more than long enough that we should have ample observed and/or reproducible evidence by now. There is none, zilch, nada. All 'proof' they do present doesn't qualify as science. So were this ANY OTHER 'scientific' theory, it would be have long been considered debunked and those who have built their careers upon its mythology would be laughed to scorn into obscurity by genuine scientists.

          because you evidently don't understand it to hold on to your religious and racist worldview

          No. You either didn't comprehend, or are deliberately misrepresenting what I pointed out. That belief in evolution has been responsible for some disgusting racist ideologies and treatment of entire races.

          "it's a belief system"? Really?

          And yes, if you postulate a theory, state you expect the evidence will be found, but still have zero evidence 160+ years on in spite of a plethora of fossil finds (which btw frequently disprove the "more complex species found in subsequent geological layers" nonsense), and when they now have more excavation and other equipment Darwin could have only dreamed of at their disposal… the best they can do is still cite the same non-evidence Darwin did (he only ever presented examples of VARIATION within a species, never any genuine example of evolution: one species turning into another)… well, that is the very definition of belief without evidence which is a faith.

          Some honest scientists (I'm not referring to Christian creationists either - I mean secular) are finally looking around at their colleagues and admitting the evolution theory is not only illogical, but has the earmarks of a religious cult.

          You may not LIKE that it meets the criteria of a religious faith because you believe it and it tilts you off-balance, but that doesn't change the fact it does. What else would you call belief, with misdirection replacing real evidence (and in fact plenty of evidence DISPROVING it)?

          All "races" or ethic groups are the same species (homo sapiens sapiens), but with different characteristics.

          Race is a concept that is subjective as humans belonging to so called different races can mate and produce human beings naturally.

          Yep, 100% correct. Inconveniently you also just 100% debunked the examples 'scientists' often give to support evolution. i.e. Darwin, and evolutionists today, still present variation within a species as 'evidence' of evolution… all it takes it the magic trick of adding millions of years, and voila, nothing up my sleeve… presto - frog to cat, cat to dog, dog to man. Odd we've never found a single example of any of these very-much necessary intermediary species. ;-D

  • 

    beatsntoons on 29/05/2021 - 12:32

    +1

    And you vote :(

  • 

    s1Lence on 29/05/2021 - 15:38

    +1

    not sure if you're joking but historically hasn't the bible-clutching right been the ones against evolution, even to this day?

  • 

    [Deactivated] on 29/05/2021 - 16:43

    Maybe. But if that were true, why are BLM members committing race-based attacks against Asian people?

    • 

      swalloweda on 29/05/2021 - 17:58

      That makes no sense, unless every racist attack is the result of a coherent belief system that includes a belief in evolution.

      If people are doing it, it's because some people in every section of society are twats.
      Same reason religious people do it, atheists do it, french people do it, Australian people do it, conservatives do it, liberals do it. Just being in a particular "club" doesn't mean you're not a twat.

      • 

        [Deactivated] on 30/05/2021 - 00:47

        Not sure if you mixed up the flow of the thread, but my post that you replied to, was in reply to the first post.

        All I was saying was, if like the first post stated…

        • 'the left' would be offended by this book…
        • because to them there is no evolution…
        • and they think all races have the same physical attributes (so they can't be racists)…

        … then the disgusting pattern of racism against Asian folks by BLM (which isn't rare, it's become so frequent the media feels the need to run point for them) wouldn't be forming. i.e. There are no 'other groups of twats' out hunting and hurting Asian folks. It's a definite regular pattern being observed, across the US, coming from BLM proponents.

        That said, much of the media over there have been completely avoiding or at least sanitizing any identifying characteristics, making it seem less frequent.

  • 

    m0usju1c3 on 29/05/2021 - 19:28

    -1

    Lots of negs, but I haven't see any response address the presuppositional issue you've touched upon though.

• 

  StingyBritches on 29/05/2021 - 10:49

  +1

  In the immortal words of Chuck Heston:
  "Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!"

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqPOeC-tnKI

• 

  Devyyn3 on 04/06/2021 - 10:56

  These are awesome. Thanks OP.